3 ms·

> I'd rather the burden of justification be the other way: what does the death penalty actually achieve, with a high burden of proof (beyond reasonable doubt) t

> I'd rather the burden of justification be the other way: what does the death penalty actually achieve, with a high burden of proof (beyond reasonable doubt) that as a policy it actually benefits society as a whole. In the past: societal self-defence. Older prisons were not as secure, and so the risk of dangerous people escaping was high(er). If they got out they could do more harm to innocent people. This is less of an issue in modern developed countries which have pretty secure buildings now, especially for those classified as the most dangerous. This may be less true in other countries where prison you may hear about prison breaks, with or without external help: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghazni_prison_escape https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghazni_prison_escape * https://globalnews.ca/news/7740153/nigerian-inmates-freed-attack/ https://globalnews.ca/news/7740153/nigerian-inmates-freed-at... If you think there's little/no chance of reform, then keeping someone around that will likely strike again is asking for trouble. See also David Oderberg's book Applied Ethics.

qwytw 6y ago
Or rather it was simply cheaper to execute someone, pre modern societies simply couldn't really afford keeping a large number of people imprisoned for significant periods of time. Considering that during some periods a fine or monetary compensation to the victims family was considered to be reasonable punishment for murder and that on the (on the opposite end of the spectrum) during other periods people were often hanged for what we would currently consider to be petty theft, one could argue that pre modern societies were much more concerned about presereving their social order rather than protecting innocent people from harm.
- throw0101a 6y ago
  > petty theft Petty theft to us now, but in previous ages there was much more scarcity, so any particular item would have been a higher percentage of a person's 'wealth' (property). Further remember that labour is the use of one's most precious resource, time (spent living), for either money or goods (if one crafts something themselves). By stealing a possession, you are stealing a portion of a person's life (that they use to earn/make that possession).

qwytw 6y ago

Or rather it was simply cheaper to execute someone, pre modern societies simply couldn't really afford keeping a large number of people imprisoned for significant periods of time. Considering that during some periods a fine or monetary compensation to the victims family was considered to be reasonable punishment for murder and that on the (on the opposite end of the spectrum) during other periods people were often hanged for what we would currently consider to be petty theft, one could argue that pre modern societies were much more concerned about presereving their social order rather than protecting innocent people from harm.

throw0101a 6y ago
> petty theft Petty theft to us now, but in previous ages there was much more scarcity, so any particular item would have been a higher percentage of a person's 'wealth' (property). Further remember that labour is the use of one's most precious resource, time (spent living), for either money or goods (if one crafts something themselves). By stealing a possession, you are stealing a portion of a person's life (that they use to earn/make that possession).